Are the Jurassic Park sequels the biggest collection of dogshit of any movie franchise? (Jurassic World Rebirth spoilers)
Usually when a franchise gets 5+ sequels at least one is pretty good, but none of the JP sequels have been.
You're viewing a single thread.
Alien and Terminator have both had nothing but shit since their second installments.
If you look at only the movies, Star Wars is at least as bad after the original trilogy. Rise of Skywalker is bad enough to make me wonder if there was intentional sabotage going on.
But for my money, the best example of a franchise that starts strong and then turns to absolute garbage in the sequels is Highlander. The original is a classic that was never meant to have a sequel. Then it got a bunch of sequels, the majority of which have been frequently cited as among the worst movies ever made.
Hell, the anime is the most faithful movie follow up, and it doesn't have any of the characters, takes place in a post apocalyptic wasteland, and introduces God, destiny, reincarnation, ghosts, druid magic, cyborgs, giant robot spiders, etc.
Alien and Terminator have both had nothing but shit since their second installments.
that's what i'm saying, Jurassic Park doesn't even have that. Lost World was okay at best.
Personally, I'd argue that Alien and Terminator weren't amazing either, and it's only Aliens and Terminator 2 that were actually great movies. They're still franchises with one really awesome installment followed by utter trash. And honestly, I think I'd take Jurassic Park 3 and Jurassic World over anything else the Aliens franchise has produced since.
I'm not saying they are definitely worse than the JP franchise, just that they're close enough that reasonable people could disagree.
Terminator was great, and is harder to properly gauge in the modern context where self fulfilling time loops and robots that look like people are common tropes. At the time, it was a groundbreaking film.
eh i wouldn't go that far. Alien and Termonator are much better than any Jurassic Park sequels.
They aren't bad movies, just not great. Better than Lost World, but not so good that I would be lamenting the terrible sequels if it weren't for the far superior installments.
All I'm saying is that there isn't a hell of a lot of difference between being disappointed in the terrible sequels that came after the first movie vs the terrible sequels that came after the second movie, especially when you aren't all that attached to the first movie.
It's all a matter of perspective anyway. Yes, Jurassic Park never got a good sequel but then it never really needed one. It was a complete story that did not call for any kind of follow up. To me, that makes the sequels less disappointing, because I don't expect anything more.
Aliens ends with unanswered questions and lots of obvious potential for follow up stories. Star Wars gave us an entire universe full of potential stories to tell, whether it followed directly from the original trilogy or did something new in the same world. That the potential is wasted by making terrible movies makes them so much worse to me.
I liked both alien 3 and Alien Resurrection, and I didn't like anything else after that (Prometheus, Romulus, etc.)
Not sure what is wrong with me.
Resurrection works as a black comedy. I mean the newborn at the end does puppydog eyes and coos at Call.
I can't agree with you about 3. I just rewatched it and it just didn't do it for me. It bothers me that 2/3rds of the survivors from Aliens get iced in the opening scene, but I do really like the scene where she bring Bishop online.
Did you watch the Assembly Cut of 3? It's a more consistent and well-rounded experience, although the film still goes downhill considerably from the moment of
Meh. I liked Prometheus and Romulus more than some of the other Alien sequels. People have different tastes/likes.
I don't think your opinions are that unusual. The first 4 Alien films are all unique in their own way, and if you watch the Assembly Cut then even 3 is a fairly consistent and satisfying experience. It's really from Prometheus onwards that the major issues started, although I will say that at least Prometheus was still trying to bring something different in its themes and setting (which were unfortunately poorly developed and hampered by the terrible writing). Covenant was just a complete mess suffering from a clear identity crisis and Romulus was soulless nostalgia-bait, as most reboots are.
I give Rise of Skywalker a pass because they were put in an impossible position.
First, Rian Johnson rat fucked them with Last Jedi, painting them into a corner with no villain to speak of, killing Luke, and reducing the size of the Resistance to something that could fit in the Falcon... Like he forgot his part was the middle part.
And then Carrie Fisher died. :( 3rd movie was supposed to be "hers", just like Force Awakens was Han's and Last Jedi was Luke's.
So, not sure what they could have done here. Fisher did die during post production on Last Jedi, so they could have done an edit where Leia dies in space, Luke survives, and then give the 3rd movie to Luke... or... re-cast the role of Leia and do it properly, or as properly as you can do without a major cast member.
First, Rian Johnson rat fucked them with Last Jedi, painting them into a corner with no villain to speak of
Did you forget about Kylo Ren, or...?
Kylo isn't the villain, he's the victim of the villain.
TIL being a victim and being a villain are mutually exclusive.
I have a dream where they cut out the completely garbage Casino Planet scenes from Last Jedi and use that runtime to finish the movie with the Palpatine reveal. It would've made Last Jedi a reasonably better movie, and more importantly given Rise of Skywalker a fucking chance to be decent.
"Add it to the movie so it makes narrative sense or... OR... now bear with me here... OR announce it in Fortnite, a game your key audience, Gen X, does not play."
Gen Who?